Alright So Which Is It?!

[MG1968]

I may be completely wrong, but haven't the majority of Americans thought that for the better part of 2 years now?

you're right, and the democrats were given control of Congress to do something about it, guess what, Pelosi/Reid have accomplished very little of what they stated they would.

 

[emainvol]

you're right, and the democrats were given control of Congress to do something about it, guess what, Pelosi/Reid have accomplished very little of what they stated they would.

I agree, then again they haven't been at it for a terribly long time either. I still think that leadership on either side of the political spectrum, especially in Congress is seriously lacking at this point though. It may be time for another referendum, but this time we completely clean house.

 

[WA_Vol]

you're right, and the democrats were given control of Congress to do something about it, guess what, Pelosi/Reid have accomplished very little of what they stated they would.

well they did send a bill giving dates when the troops would be removed from Iraq which Bush vetoed.

 

[MG1968]

well they did send a bill giving dates when the troops would be removed from Iraq which Bush vetoed.

which means they've accomplished nothing, right?

 

[BigPapaVol]

well they did send a bill giving dates when the troops would be removed from Iraq which Bush vetoed.

can't imagine why he would veto such solid thinking.

 

[vader]

:birgits_giggle:

can't imagine why he would veto such solid thinking.

 

[All Vol!]

we are screwed if either one of them are elected. i heard on a radio show from a guy who was in Clintons cabinet that Hil was going to raise taxes by a third, and that she is lying about pulling troops. He said that she won't pull because she doesn't want to look weak. Just thought that was interesting.

this only explains why we're "screwed" if Clinton is elected. What's Obama's problem?

 

[hmanvolfan]

this only explains why we're "screwed" if Clinton is elected. What's Obama's problem?

I guess we'll have to elect him. He said if he doesn't get elected there will be race riots across the country. :blink:

 

[emainvol]

I guess we'll have to elect him. He said if he doesn't get elected there will be race riots across the country. :blink:

really? i must have missed that, could you link?

 

[MG1968]

Obama: Bush Ignoring Blacks' "Quiet Riot", Democratic Presidential Candidate Says Hurricane Katrina Has Fueled Resentment Among Blacks - CBS News

when taken in context, Obama's remark can be taken to mean a growing dissatisfaction within the black community, it can also be seen as a tacit encouragement to less than "quiet rioting" should the black community's frustration continue unabated.

not as incendiary as Sharpton to be sure.

 

[WA_Vol]

which means they've accomplished nothing, right?

Only because Bush vetoed it.

 

[WA_Vol]

can't imagine why he would veto such solid thinking.

How many more trillion dollars do we throw at this before we decide it was a mistake and leave? 100 trillion?

At some point the Iraqi's are going to be given a timetable of when the U.S. leaves and when they must take over their own security. They will know in advance and will be given dates.

The U.S. isn't going to one day decide to pack up and leave without notice. The sooner they give Iraq the date and expect them to be responsible for security, the better.

 

[GAVol]

I'd be willing to bet that the Iraqis have already been given a target date.

 

[WA_Vol]

I'd be willing to bet that the Iraqis have already been given a target date.

I would hope so.

I would guess the Democrats wanted dates in writing that were sooner then the dates Bush gave them,and that was the reason for the veto.

We have to get out of Iraq before Bush bankrupts the treasury.

 

[allvol123]

We have to get out of Iraq before Bush bankrupts the treasury.

Yes, spending more money than you should seems to be a hot button issue with Congress.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Yes, spending more money than you should seems to be a hot button issue with Congress.

very nice

 

[TennNC]

I'm just trying to figure out why people think he would be a great president. I hear over and over we need to find someone who can unite the people. I don't see him being a figure that would unite our nation.

This is a repeat conversation from other threads, but if you're really interested, take 30 minutes and read this article.

Profiles: The Conciliator: Reporting & Essays: The New Yorker

 

[WA_Vol]

Yes, spending more money than you should seems to be a hot button issue with Congress.

Don't blame Congress for the trillions being spent in Iraq. That was Bush's decision to go to war there and his decision to not remove the troops sooner.

 

[allvol123]

Don't blame Congress for the trillions being spent in Iraq. That was Bush's decision to go to war there and his decision to not remove the troops sooner.

Did I? I missed that. I was merely claiming that spending taxpayer money inappropriately is hardly a disease that infects only the President. So if spending is your issue with this war then you have a lot of battles to fight in DC.

 

[WA_Vol]

Did I? I missed that. I was merely claiming that spending taxpayer money inappropriately is hardly a disease that infects only the President. So if spending is your issue with this war then you have a lot of battles to fight in DC.

I make a comment about spending for the War in Iraq and you bring up Congress.

So because Congress is misspending billions that makes it ok for Bush to misspend trillions on the war in Iraq? I fail to see your point.

 

[allvol123]

I make a comment about spending for the War in Iraq and you bring up Congress.

So because Congress is misspending billions that makes it ok for Bush to misspend trillions on the war in Iraq? I fail to see your point.

You made the comment "We need to get out of Iraq before Bush bankrupts the treasury."

I was merely pointing out that bankrupting the treasury will have much more to do with the complete lack of responsibility in all of DC rather than this war and Bush.

 

[WA_Vol]

You made the comment "We need to get out of Iraq before Bush bankrupts the treasury."

I was merely pointing out that bankrupting the treasury will have much more to do with the complete lack of responsibility in all of DC rather than this war and Bush.

the single biggest expenditure now is the war in Iraq. No one in DC has been as fisically irresponsible as the current president.

 

[GAVol]

the single biggest expenditure now is the war in Iraq. No one in DC has been as fisically irresponsible as the current president.

Presidents don't appropriate funds . . . but I agree that he and the former Republican congress went on a spending spree.

 

[allvol123]

the single biggest expenditure now is the war in Iraq. No one in DC has been as fisically irresponsible as the current president.

Is it? Remember in your scenario that a large portion of this money would be needed as the military has to exist whether we are in Iraq or not. So you need to sort that out before you call all of military spending, Iraq spending. Once you do that and compare it to spending on medicare and social security and every "homer" project supported by Congress...well I am sure you will still feel the same way.

 

[WA_Vol]

Is it? Remember in your scenario that a large portion of this money would be needed as the military has to exist whether we are in Iraq or not. So you need to sort that out before you call all of military spending, Iraq spending. Once you do that and compare it to spending on medicare and social security and every "homer" project supported by Congress...well I am sure you will still feel the same way.

And how did Bush address these problems? By proposing a prescription drug plan, creating a whole set of entitlements, that we can't afford while leaving the existing problems to future presidents to correct.